I  INTRODUCTION

　　 When two moral  systems  have incompatible  moral  tenets
such  as  Buddhism  and  Confucianism, and  if a third  moral
system claims to have integrated  the two conflicating  moral
teachings;  serious  questions  arise  on on theoretical  and
practical  grounds.  One  of  the  questions  is whether  the
integration is syncretism or synthesis. According to Thomas
F. Hoult, "all religious doctrines  are syncretic.''(1)If the
　　 Nagarjuna asked: If one, keeping the precepts for laymen,
　　 can  be born  in the celestial  world, attain  the way of
　　 Bodhisattva, and realize  nirvana, why does one need  the
　　 precepts  for monks? He answered: Although both ways lead
　　 to emancipation, there are differences  of difficulty and
　　 easiness.  Laymen  have to make a living, which  requires
　　 various  toilsome  work.  Hence, if one wishes  to devote
　　 oneself  to the Buddha  dharma, one's family life will be
　　 ruined.  However, if one devotes  oneself to one's family
　　 the way of the Buddha dharma  will be neglected.  One can
　　 neither take nor discard the Way;

P.426　　　　　　　　　　

　　 to follow the Way properly is difficult. However, if  one
　　 becomes   a  monk,  one  frees   oneself   from   worldly
　　 responsibility, anger, and disturbance  and finds it easy
　　 to devote oneself to practicing the Way.(2)

Sosan(c) (1520-1604), a great Korean patriarch, supplied this
justification:

　　 To become  a monk and leave one's family behind  is not a
　　 trivial matter.  The purpose is not to seek for  physical
　　 ease, nor is it to eat and to be clad luxuriously, nor is
　　 it to seek for fame and property.   It is to avoid  birth
　　 and death, to sever worldly  passions, to succeed  to the
　　 wisdom of the Buddha, and to deliver all sentient  beings
　　 by transcending the three worlds.(3)

The moral issue is whether  the Buddha dharma can be followed
without  jettisoning  one's  filial  duty  to one's  parents.
Buddhist  monks  were  subjected  to  harsh  criticism   from
Neo-Confucian  philosophers.   Thus  Chu  Hsi(d)  (1130-1200)
wrote:

　　 The  mere  fact  that  they  discard  the  Three  Bonds
　　 (between  ruler  and  minister,  father  and  son,  and
　　 husband  and  wife)  and  the  Five  Constant   Virtues
　　 (righteousness  on the part of the father, deep love on
　　 the part of the mother, friendliness on the part of the
　　 elder  brother, respect  on  the  part  of the  younger
　　 brother, and filial  piety  on the part  of the son) is
　　 already a crime of the greatest magnitude. Nothing more
　　 need be said about the
　　 rest.(4)

Wittgenstein  seems to be right: "When two principles  really
do meet which  cannot  be reconciled  with  one another, then
each man declares  the other  a fool and heretic."(5) Chu Hsi
regarded  the  Buddhist  way as harmful  to the  morality  of
mankind.  He pointed  out that  the Buddhists  "renounce  the
family to attend to their own virtue in solitude.  This shows
they  are  different  in substance  from  the way...."(6) His
advice was that

P.427

"a student  should  forthwith  get as far away  from Buddhist
doctrines as from licentious songs and beautiful women.
Otherwise they will soon infiltrate him."(7)
　　 As Chu Hsi's influence  was strongly felt in Korea during
the Yi dynasty (1392-1910), during that period Buddhist monks
became  one of the seven despised  low classes  of the social